From US Social Forum Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Back to ICT Policies

The Online Content Policy covers all sites ending with the domain It provides a general approach for how content submitted to these sites will be treated.

It began from the conversation starting here.

Not only is it an issue of policy, but we must work together as a team to address these editorial issues and expose our proposed solution to them here. - Mallory

Login v Anonymous

On the question of logins, for example, there's a fine balance between allowing people to contribute content to web sites without the onerous restrictions of getting a login vs. promoting the development of confidence and trust through online collaboration.

I think that allowing for anonymous edits will not get in the way of developing confidence and trust in a wiki space. ~~ MarkDilley
True, it won't get in the way. However, I think we should promote logins as a way of promoting confidence and trust and an online identity. ~~Jamie

In the case of this trac instance, we're allowing people to post without a login - anonymously, in an effort to make asking for help as easy as possible.

In ticket #14 - we've gone back and forth on anonymous edits.

For other sites (like registration and workshop submission) - I think we'll unquestionably want to require a login so people can have control over the content without needing an admin to update their information (and have to guess as to whether or not they really are the person who entered it).

I don't share this unquestionable assertion - I do agree that we want people to update their information without going through a gatekeeper/webmaster - but I think it is quite reasonable to allow open editing as our starting point. ~~ MarkDilley
I like the idea of allowing open editing on as much as possible - even as a starting point for all content (except when we will be asking for private information - see below). In places where we have open editing - a login is truly not a requirement. I think in some places (for example workshop submissions), we may want to fight hard for open editing - something that will require some fighting since it goes against the grain of what most organizers expect. There may be other instances (such as edits to, access to remove members from an email list, ability to delete content without a backup, etc. that we probably will want to keep logins. ~~ Jamie

Hate Speech or Threats of Violence

Will be removed from the wiki immediately

There are interesting ideas about this policy for IMC's Open Posting practice. The part about how stories are merely "hidden" and the criteria for that action are here: - Mallory

Privacy Issues

Respect people privacy - do not post private information without prior knowledge of it being ok and if every information is not wanted here - delete it. Wiki does have a history function that we can work around in needed cases - delete page and repopulate with current info.

As organizers, access to information is critically important to building our movement. Our data belongs to the movement. Therefore, all data submitted to a is assumed to be public data unless otherwise noted. Exceptions include:

  • Contact information that is specifically indicated as private in the form requesting it
  • Credit card information (for registration)

Politically Motivated Attacks

Attacks of a personal or direct nature will be reverted. Argue viewpoints if that's what's wanted but keep the personal out of it.


Your perspective is wrong.

Rather than:

You are an aging, rigid fool and your opinions reflect that.

Doing that not only solves the instant issue but many other similar potential abuses. It also respects the fact that no opinion belongs to any one person -- we express an opinion after discussions and experiences with huge numbers of people -- experiencing a universe of thinking -- and once we express it, it becomes part of that same universe of thinking and is not longer ours.

Best practice is to:

  1. -- Stay on topic
  2. -- Argue the idea...not the person.

Removal of Content

Some content is on sites in which all changes and deletions are archived. Other content is on sites in which changes changes or deletions are permanent.

When removing content, we encounter disagreements as to whether the content should be removed or not. For content in which changes or removals is permanent - how do we preserve that content for the sake of transparency?

For content that is hate speech or incitements of violence - do we remove it completely if it's on a site that preservers the history?

I'd like to again suggest that content only be "hidden". - Mallory


On the wiki, spam is a community solution - a wiki is a community of people building a 'place' and keeping the graffiti out is just part of the 'place' - we don't want a police state of lockdown - but we do want to intelligently decide what the next minimum step is needed. Always do the least that we can possibly do to make it work. ~~ MarkDilley

I think as we continue developing these resources, we're likely to face spam, politically motivated attacks, requests for information to be taken down, and other challenges that will be very difficult for us to evaluate without some collective thinking in advance.